4.7 Article

Equine Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells have a Reduced Tendon Differentiation Capacity Compared to Embryonic Stem Cells

期刊

FRONTIERS IN VETERINARY SCIENCE
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2015.00055

关键词

equine; embryonic stem cells; induced pluripotent stem cells; tendon; differentiation

资金

  1. Horserace Betting Levy Board [vet/prj/762]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tendon injuries occur commonly in horses and their repair through scar tissue formation predisposes horses to a high rate of re-injury. Pluripotent stem cells may provide a cell replacement therapy to improve tendon tissue regeneration and lower the frequency of re-injury. We have previously demonstrated that equine embryonic stem cells (ESCs) differentiate into the tendon cell lineage upon injection into the damaged horse tendon and can differentiate into functional tendon cells in vitro to generate artificial tendons. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have now been derived from horses but, to date, there are no reports on their ability to differentiate into tendon cells. As iPSCs can be produced from adult cell types, they provide a more accessible source of cells than ESCs, which require the use of horse embryos. The aim of this study was to compare tendon differentiation by ESCs and iPSCs produced through two independent methods. In two-dimensional differentiation assays, the iPSCs expressed tendon-associated genes and proteins, which were enhanced by the presence of transforming growth factor-beta 3. However, in three-dimensional (3D) differentiation assays, the iPSCs failed to differentiate into functional tendon cells and generate artificial tendons. These results demonstrate the utility of the 3D in vitro tendon assay for measuring tendon differentiation and the need for more detailed studies to be performed on equine iPSCs to identify and understand their epigenetic differences from pluripotent ESCs prior to their clinical application.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据